Anti-social Behaviour: Ultrasonic Dispersal Devices

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have received on the indiscriminate use of ultrasonic dispersal devices as a deterrent to anti-social behaviour; what replies have been sent; and what action they will take on this matter.

Lord West of Spithead: The Home Office have received a range of representations and correspondence concerning the use of the "Mosquito" ultrasonic dispersal device. Five were from Members of Parliament on behalf of their constituents, 15 Questions have been asked by three Members of Parliament in the House of Commons and 13 items of correspondence from members of the public and local authorities have been received. Of the representations and correspondence received, five were concerned that the device might breach a person's human rights and two were concerned with the legality of the device. Other questions and correspondence received referred to the use of the device and whether the Home Office will provide guidance.
	The Home Office encourages local agencies to consider the full range of innovations, schemes and practices intended to reduce crime, the fear of crime and anti-social behaviour. It is for local agencies such as the police and local authorities to decide on the most appropriate interventions to tackle anti-social behaviour based on their knowledge of what works best locally, adopting a tiered approach to tackling anti-social behaviour using a blend of measures to provide a proportionate response.
	The Home Office does not recommend or promote any commercial ultrasonic dispersal device or venture and at the present time does not have any plans to take further action on this matter.

Armed Forces: Alternative Landing Ships Logistics

Lord Burnett: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How long it has taken to construct the alternate landing ships logistics; and what has been the cost of these vessels.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The four landing ship dock (auxiliary) (LSD(A))vessels, which were formerly known as the alternative landing ships logistics, were all built over a seven-year period between December 2000 and November 2007. Each vessel took between four and five years to construct.
	A table showing the most recently published construction costs, which totalled £596 million (£342 million for the two vessels provided by Swan Hunter and £255 million for the two provided by BAES) is available at Part 4 (page 13) of the National Audit Office report into the LSD(A) project. This was published in November 2007 and can be found on the internet at www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/07-08/070898iii.pdf. A copy is also available in the Library of the House. Due to the complexity of the two contracts, neither provided separate costs for the individual vessels.

Army: Prisoner Handling

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What were the results of the audit conducted by the director of operational capability into the Army's training for prisoner handling, which reported to the Minister of State for the Armed Forces in November 2007; and whether they will place in the Library of the House a copy of this audit.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The Directorate of Operational Capability's (DOC) ability to carry out its role as an independent auditor is dependent on the willingness of service personnel to share their thoughts in a candid manner on the understanding that they will remain private. I am therefore withholding the information requested as its disclosure would inhibit the free and frank provision of advice.
	The noble Lord will be aware that the Ministry of Defence recently published the Aitken report, an investigation into cases of deliberate abuse and unlawful killing in Iraq in 2003 and 2004, a copy of which was placed in the Library of the House.
	The Ministry of Defence has this week received representations from public interest lawyers over the form of any future inquiry into the death of Baha Mousa. The Defence Secretary will consider those representations along with the other material and his decision will be announced in a Ministerial Statement in due course.

Asylum Seekers: Children

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have removed from the United Kingdom any children with failed asylum applications; if so, how many; and to which countries.

Lord West of Spithead: The accompanying table shows the number of children recorded as having claimed asylum at some stage (as principal applicants and as dependants of principal applicants) who were removed from the UK in 2006, broken down by destination. This is the latest complete year for which figures are currently available.
	An unaccompanied child under the age of 18 would not be considered for removal from the UK unless it has been established with the country to which the child is to be removed that adequate reception arrangements are in place. Officers must liaise with social services and/or the nominated guardian with responsibility for the care of the child in the UK to ensure the removal is effected in the most sensitive manner possible.
	A child under the age of 18 recorded as being a principal asylum applicant may not necessarily be unaccompanied; they could, for example, be living with a relative who, in turn, may or may not have status in the UK.
	National statistics on asylum removals during 2007 will be published in the "Asylum Statistics: 4th Quarter 2007" bulletin on 26 February and will be available from the Library of the House and the Home Office's research, development and statistics website at: www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.
	
		
			 Removals, voluntary departures and assisted returns(1), of child(2) asylum applicants, by destination, in 2006(3)(P) 
			 Destination Principal asylum applicants(4) Dependants of asylum applicants Total 
			 Albania 10 65 75 
			 Macedonia - 5 5 
			 Moldova - 5 5 
			 Romania 10 95 110 
			 Russia - 20 20 
			 Serbia (inc. Kosovo) 5 55 60 
			 Turkey 5 75 80 
			 Ukraine - 10 10 
			 EU accession states 5 10 15 
			 Other former USSR * 25 25 
			 Europe other 60 110 170 
			 Europe total 95 480 575 
			 Colombia 5 20 25 
			 Ecuador - 25 25 
			 Jamaica 5 60 65 
			 Americas other * 50 50 
			 Americas total 10 155 160 
			 Algeria - 65 65 
			 Angola * 25 25 
			 Burundi - * * 
			 Cameroon * * 5 
			 Congo - 10 10 
			 Dem. Rep. Congo * 10 10 
			 Eritrea - - - 
			 Ethiopia * 5 5 
			 Gambia - * * 
			 Ghana * 10 15 
			 Ivory Coast - 5 5 
			 Kenya - 15 15 
			 Liberia - 5 5 
			 Nigeria 10 50 60 
			 Rwanda - * * 
			 Sierra Leone - 5 5 
			 Somalia - 5 5 
			 Sudan - - - 
			 Tanzania - 10 10 
			 Uganda * 15 15 
			 Zimbabwe - 40 40 
			 Africa other 5 60 60 
			 Africa total 20 330 350 
			 Iran 5 30 35 
			 Iraq 20 40 60 
			 Libya * 10 10 
			 Syria - 10 10 
			 Middle East other * 60 65 
			 Middle East total 25 150 175 
			 Afghanistan 10 5 15 
			 Bangladesh * 5 10 
			 China - * * 
			 India * 20 20 
			 Pakistan 15 240 255 
			 Sri Lanka * 30 30 
			 Vietnam * 10 10 
			 Asia other - 35 35 
			 Asia total 30 345 375 
			 Other, and destination not known - 10 10 
			 Total removals of children 180 1,465 1,645 
		
	
	(1) Includes enforced removals, persons refused entry at port and subsequently removed (including cases dealt with at juxtaposed controls), persons departing voluntarily following enforcement action initiated against them, persons leaving under assisted voluntary return programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration, and those who it is established have left the UK without informing the immigration authorities.
	(2) Persons recorded as being under 18 on their date of removal from the UK. These figures may overstate because some applicants aged 18 or over may claim to be younger on their date of removal.
	(3) Figures rounded to the nearest five, ( - = 0, * = 1 or 2). Figures may not sum to the totals shown because of rounding.
	(4) Persons who had claimed asylum at some stage, excluding dependants.
	(P) Provisional figures.

Building Regulations

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether current government figures on the carbon dioxide emissions from housing stock are based on the assumption that there has been 100 per cent compliance with part L of the building regulations.

Baroness Andrews: The final regulatory impact assessment for the 2006 changes to part L of the building regulations assumed full compliance. This was reflected in official government estimates of savings of carbon dioxide emissions from domestic buildings.

Building Regulations

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have any proposals to integrate any part of the code for sustainable homes into the mandatory building regulations by 2010.

Baroness Andrews: The Government plan to integrate the energy efficiency requirements of code level 3 into the building regulations in 2010.
	In December 2006, the Government confirmed their intention for all new homes to be zero carbon by 2016 with a progressive tightening of the energy efficiency standards in part L of the building regulations. Compared with the current energy efficiency standards, in 2010 there will be a 25 per cent improvement and by 2013 a 44 per cent improvement, with the zero carbon target set for 2016. This will improve the energy efficiency of the fabric of homes, and encourage the use of energy from renewable sources.
	The 25 per cent improvement in energy efficiency for new homes that is required from 2010 is the minimum energy efficiency standard required for a code level 3 home, a 44 per cent improvement for a code level 4 home and the zero carbon component for a code level 6 home.

Central-Local Concordat

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What changes they propose to make to the policies and working arrangements of the Department of Health following the signing of the Central-Local Concordat on 12 December 2007, both in general and in specific response to the agreement in the concordat (a) that "there should be a presumption that powers are best exercised at the lowest effective and practical level"; (b) that central government undertakes to "progressively remove obstacles which prevent councils from pursuing their role, including reducing the burden of appraisal and approval regimes, the ring-fencing of funds for specific purposes and the volume of guidance it issues", (c) that the number of national indicators should be "around 200"; (d) that in relation to the negotiation of new-style local area agreements "this objective will require major changes in behaviour and practice from central government departments, their agencies, government offices, councils and local partners"; and what is the process and timetable for such changes.

Lord Darzi of Denham: The Central-Local Concordat, agreed between the Government and the Local Government Association (LGA), on behalf of local authorities in England, was signed in December last year. It commits both parties to a framework of principles to secure a new relationship between central government and local government. Discharging the rights and responsibilities of central government and local government set out in the concordat will require major changes in the behaviour and practice of both parties. The operation of this agreement will be monitored on a continuing basis, through renewed central-local partnership arrangements.
	We are discussing with the LGA how we take forward the concordat, focusing on its guiding principles and specific commitments. These include encouraging councils to make effective use of their power to promote the well-being of their area; enabling local government to conduct a growing share of the business of government; central government consulting and collaborating with councils in setting national policies and proposing legislation; reducing the burden of appraisal and approval regimes and the volume of guidance issued by central government to local authorities; supporting and encouraging strong leadership and effective partnership working at local level; and increasing local democratic accountability of key public services, in particular the police and health services.
	A single set of 198 national indicators for local authorities and local authority partnerships was announced as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review 2007 and consultation on detailed definitions of the set concluded on 21 December 2007, with the aim of announcing final decisions in February.
	Local authorities across England are currently engaged in discussions with government offices on behalf of all government departments on the content of new-style local area agreements, which will have effect from 2008-09.
	The department is working to ensure that each new local area agreement is informed by a joint strategic needs assessment of the local population's health and well-being needs carried out by the local authority, primary care trust and their partners.
	In addition, the department launched in December 2007 Putting People First. This concordat was signed up to by the Government and a number of partners, and outlined the direction for the reform and personalisation of social care.
	This will give greater control and power to users in determining how and by whom their services are provided. Approximately half a billion pounds will support the reform of the social care system over the next three years.

Central-Local Concordat

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What changes they propose to make to the policies and working arrangements of the Home Office following the signing of the Central-Local Concordat on 12 December 2007, both in general and in specific response to the agreement in the concordat (a) that "there should be a presumption that powers are best exercised at the lowest effective and practical level"; (b) that central government undertakes to "progressively remove obstacles which prevent councils from pursuing their role, including reducing the burden of appraisal and approval regimes, the ring-fencing of funds for specific purposes and the volume of guidance it issues"; (c) that the number of national indicators should be "around 200"; (d) that in relation to the negotiation of new-style local area agreements "this objective will require major changes in behaviour and practice from central government departments, their agencies, government offices, councils and local partners"; and what is the process and timetable for such changes.

Lord West of Spithead: The Central-Local Concordat, agreed between the Government and the Local Government Association (LGA), on behalf of local authorities in England, was signed in December 2007. It commits both parties to a framework of principles to secure a new relationship between central government and local government. Discharging the rights and responsibilities of central government and local government set out in the concordat will require major changes in the behaviour and practice of both parties. The operation of the concordat will be monitored on a continuing basis, through renewed central-local partnership arrangements.
	The Home Office is committed to the principles of the concordat and will continue to be involved in discussion with the Department for Communities and Local Government on how to take it forward, focusing on its guiding principles and specific commitments. These include encouraging councils to make effective use of their power to promote the well-being of their area; enabling local government to conduct a growing share of the business of government; central government consulting and collaborating with councils in setting national policies and proposing legislation; reducing the burden of appraisal and approval regimes and the volume of guidance issued by central government to local authorities; supporting and encouraging strong leadership and effective partnership working at local level; and increasing local democratic accountability of key public services, in particular the police and health services.
	A single set of 198 national indicators for local authorities and local authority partnerships was announced as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review 2007 and consultation on detailed definitions of the set concluded on 21 December 2007, with the aim of announcing final decisions in February.
	Local authorities across England are currently engaged in discussions with government offices on behalf of all government departments on the content of new-style local area agreements, which will have effect from 2008-09.

Central-Local Concordat

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What instructions and advice are being given to the Learning and Skills Council concerning changes to its policies and working arrangements following the signing of the Central-Local Concordat on 12 December 2007, both in general and in specific response to the agreement in the concordat (a) "that there should be a presumption that powers are best exercised at the lowest effective and practical level"; (b) that central government undertakes to "progressively remove obstacles which prevent councils from pursuing their role, including reducing the burden of appraisal and approval regimes, the ring-fencing of funds for specific purposes and the volume of guidance it issues"; and (c) that in relation to the negotiation of new-style local area agreements "this objective will require major changes in behaviour and practice from central government departments, their agencies, government offices, councils and local partners"; and what is the process and timetable for such changes.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: The Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) is fully committed to the principles set out in the Central-Local Concordat, including in particular the new performance management arrangements for local authorities and their partners, based on a single set of 198 national indicators and a limited number of targets agreed in local area agreements (LAAs). We have ensured that skills are represented in the national indicator set and we are currently working closely with other government departments, government offices, the Learning and Skills Council and others to agree the new LAAs with local authorities and their partners by June.
	Statutory guidance, Creating Strong, Safe and Prosperous Communities, was issued by the DCLG for public consultation on 20 November. The consultation closed on 12 February and the aim is to issue the final guidance later this year.

Climate Change: Carbon Capture and Storage

Lord Jenkin of Roding: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the construction of a carbon capture and storage plant and the associated pipeline infrastructure will qualify for credits under the Emissions Trading Scheme.

Lord Rooker: The details of how carbon capture and storage (CSS) will be included within the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) are yet to be finalised. None the less, the current proposal is that CCS installations will not be required to surrender allowances for CO2 that has been captured and stored. In future phases with a full or high degree of auctioning, CCS plants would not be required to purchase allowances for CO2 stored. Consequently, CCS would be covered in the same way as other abatement technologies already within the scope of the scheme, ensuring that the EU ETS remains technology neutral. It is not currently envisaged that CCS should be incorporated into the scheme by means of credits or that it should in any way affect the role of CDM within the EU ETS.

Disabled People: Suitable Placements

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration they are giving to the Local Government Ombudsman's so far unmet calls for the payment by a local authority of up to £100,000 in compensation to the parents of a profoundly disabled daughter who was denied a suitable permanent placement for more than 18 months; and what action they will be taking on this matter.

Baroness Andrews: The Government have no remit either to comment on or to intervene in individual cases which come before the Local Government Ombudsman. The statute provides that, where a council decides not to implement the recommendations of the ombudsman, it must publish in a local newspaper both the fact that it is refusing to accept the ombudsman's recommendations and its reasons for so doing. The ultimate judgment on the behaviour of the council will be that exercised by the electorate themselves.

Government: Legislative Programme

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which provisions of each Bill announced in the Queen's Speech, or published thereafter, apply to Scotland.

Lord Davidson of Glen Clova: The Government have introduced 22 Bills to date during this Session of Parliament. Twenty of these Bills contain provisions that apply directly to Scotland.
	Seven Bills introduced within this parliamentary Session contain provisions that trigger the Sewel convention:
	Climate Change Bill;Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill;Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill;Education and Skills Bill;Health and Social Care Bill;Pensions Bill; and Housing and Regeneration Bill.
	Under the terms of the Sewel convention, the Government have committed themselves to not normally legislating in a devolved area without the consent of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Executive have sought, or are in the process of seeking, the Scottish Parliament's consent for the provisions triggering the convention in each of the Bills highlighted above.

Health: Biosimilar Medicines

Lord Rea: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether advice in the British National Formulary on the non-substitution of medicines is sufficiently prominent; and whether, following the introduction of biosimilars into clinical practice, the British National Formulary will clearly indicate medicines that should not be substituted; and
	What discussions they have had with (a) the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, and (b) the Joint Formulary Committee, regarding the identification of biosimilar products in the British National Formulary; and
	What reassurances they have received from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency about the implementation of pharmacovigilance systems in the use of biosimilar medicines.

Lord Darzi of Denham: The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which has the responsibility for regulation of medicines in the United Kingdom, operates a pharmacovigilance system for all licensed medicines and has achieved a widespread reputation for excellence in this area. Reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions directly from healthcare professionals and patients (through the yellow card scheme) and from pharmaceutical companies forms one of the most important data sources used by MHRA. Newly licensed medicines undergo intensive monitoring through this scheme and are assigned a "black triangle" in product literature to signify this to healthcare professionals.
	Biosimilar medicinal products are new medicines that have been designed to be similar to existing "biological" medicines. Because these medicines are complex and may not be completely identical to the existing medicine, the MHRA intensively monitors approved biosimilar medicines and assigns them black triangle status. It is also mandatory for the applicant to submit an appropriate risk management plan at the time of the initial marketing authorisation (MA) application, which is assessed to ensure that the applicant has demonstrated that adequate arrangements are in place for continued safety evaluation.
	The MHRA encourages MA holders for biosimilar products to give them a brand name so that there is no confusion or inadvertent substitution between the generic and original medicines, in relation to prescribing or dispensing. The MHRA also encourages the use of brand names for adverse drug reaction reporting in relation to biosimilar medicines and has recently promoted this message in a bulletin to healthcare professionals (Drug Safety Update, February 2008).
	The British National Formulary (BNF) usually reflects the safety information contained within the summary of product characteristics that relates to the product and includes black triangles where appropriate. The MHRA has raised the subject of biosimilar medicines with the BNF, highlighting the MHRA policy to intensively monitor these medicines. The MHRA also provides the BNF editorial team with a copy of each monthly edition of its bulletin Drug Safety Update, in which prescribing and adverse drug reaction reporting issues for biosimilar medicines were raised very recently. However, the BNF takes advice on this from expert clinical advisers and the BNF Joint Formulary Committee, on which the MHRA is represented.
	The Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain's Professional Standards and Guidance for the Sale and Supply of Medicines provides advice to pharmacists on the supply of prescribed medicines. This states that, except in an emergency, a specifically named product should not be substituted by any other product without the approval of the patient, or carer and the prescriber, and in the case of hospital drugs, the approval of the therapeutics committee, or in line with other similar locally agreed protocols.

Health: Dentistry

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Under what circumstances free dental care is available.

Lord Darzi of Denham: In England, all those aged under 18 are exempt from National Health Service dental charges along with other groups such as those on benefits and pregnant women. Dental treatment carried out by a hospital dentist is also free. Information on who is exempt from charges is available to the public via all dental practices, primary care trusts or at: www.nhs.uk/Healthcosts/Pages/Dentalcosts.aspx.

Identity Security

Lord Hanningfield: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any projects in the Home Office have been suspended or delayed due to concerns about identity security; if so, which projects have been delayed; and what the impact on the overall performance and work of the department will be.

Lord West of Spithead: This information is not held centrally and can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Immigration: Haslar

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord West of Spithead on 24 January (WA 65), whether they will confirm the number of men held in Haslar at the end of January who had been detained for over a year; how many of those had been held in other detention centres; and how many were detained only on the ground that their nationality had not been determined.

Lord West of Spithead: The available information shows that on 31 January 2008 seven detainees had been detained for over a year at Haslar. They had not previously been held in any other immigration removal centre. None of the detainees was detained only on the ground that their nationality had not been determined.

Kenya: Mwai Kibaki

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether Mwai Kibaki is subject to a United Kingdom travel ban.

Lord West of Spithead: It is not Home Office policy to comment on individual cases.

Marine Environment: Conservation Areas

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are planning to increase the number of special areas of conservation under the 1992 European Union habitats directive around United Kingdom territorial waters.

Lord Rooker: Yes. Natural England has recently completed a survey of seven areas of search for additional special areas of conservation in English territorial waters. The results are being analysed with a view to proposing possible sites later this year. The Joint Nature Conservation Committee is currently consulting on the first tranche of seven special areas of conservation in the offshore area and is continuing to survey additional areas of search.

Neighbourhood Renewal Fund

Lord Harris of Haringey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements government offices had in place to check the outcomes and outputs claimed by local authorities for their use of Neighbourhood Renewal Fund moneys during the period 2004 to 2006; and what guidance they provided to local authorities on checking the accuracy of outcomes and outputs claimed by groups to which Neighbourhood Renewal Fund moneys were passed.

Baroness Andrews: The local authority was the accountable body for the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF) and was required to have in place effective systems to ensure that NRF was spent correctly and appropriately. Government offices (GOs) were charged with reviewing the effectiveness of the local strategic partnership (LSP) and helping the LSP to identify learning needs and to access appropriate support. The review was expected to take into account the level of LSP spend against its allocation and whether the NRF spend had been targeted at activities agreed by the LSP and had had an impact on achieving outcomes in accordance with the local neighbourhood renewal strategy, including national floor targets.
	Once the review was completed GOs prepared a report for the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit (NRU), which included a rating of each LSP based on a traffic-light system. In cases where the LSP performance was assessed as "red" or "amber/red", NRU worked with the GO and LSP to identify and implement a support package aimed at improving delivery within the local area.
	GOs were not charged with checking outputs but rather were responsible for assessing an area's progress against PSA and other deprivation-related targets.

Neighbourhood Renewal Fund

Lord Harris of Haringey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assessment they have made of the outcome of the £47,100 funding provided to Dr Foster Intelligence by the London Borough of Waltham Forest under the government-funded Better Neighbourhoods Initiative, given that Dr Foster Intelligence's ethics committee found that the work concerned broke the organisation's code of conduct in terms of accuracy and statistical methodology.

Baroness Andrews: No assessment has been made by central government, but I am aware that the London Borough of Waltham Forest's internal auditors are carrying out an investigation into the placing of the contract.

Polygamy

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are their immigration and social welfare policies on polygamous marriages.

Lord West of Spithead: The Immigration Rules prevent a man from bringing in a second or subsequent wife with him to the UK if another woman has already been admitted to the UK as his wife and that marriage has not been dissolved. All those who seek leave to enter the United Kingdom for the purpose of settling as a spouse of a person resident in the UK or a British citizen must have a visa in this category for entry. If the person does not hold this visa, they will be refused leave to enter.
	Although the current Immigration Rules relating to spouses prevent two wives from seeking entry to the UK in this capacity, there are ways in which all parties to a polygamous marriage may be legally present here. For example, a second wife may come to the UK legally through an alternative migration route other than in her capacity as a spouse. In addition, the present prohibition for second wives in the Immigration Rules did not exist before 1988.

Ports

Lord Fearn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many passengers sailed from English ports on holiday in the years 2005 and 2006.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The information requested is published in the following table:
	
		
			 Cruise and ferry passengers departing from English ports by purpose of visit (million passengers) 
			  2005 2006 
			 Total passengers (all reasons) 11.2 11.3 
			 of which:   
			 UK residents stating reason for journey as holiday or visiting friends or relatives 5.7 5.8 
			 Foreign residents returning from holiday or visiting friends or relatives in the UK 2.6 2.5 
			 Sources:  DfT sea passenger surveys (for total passenger numbers) and ONS international passenger survey (for estimated breakdown by reasons for journey).

Ports

Lord Fearn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many passenger transport ships sail between the ports of England and France on a regular basis.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Information from the Department for Transport's sea passenger surveys shows that in any given month in 2006 there were between 26 and 30 vessels operating on regular services between UK and French ports.

Transport: Overseas Lorries

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many lorries registered overseas have been detected on the A55 in north Wales by (1) the police and (2) the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency, which were (a) overloaded; (b) in an unsatisfactory mechanical condition; and (c) driven in breach of drivers' hours regulations, within the last 12 months for which records are available; what penalties were imposed on those drivers found to be in breach of legislation; and how many of the penalties have been paid.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The relevant statistics relating to the Department for Transport's Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) are:
	(a) overloading prohibitions = 463;(b) mechanical prohibitions = 285; and (c) drivers' hours prohibitions = 899
	VOSA does not record the nationality of drivers. There were very few prosecutions for these specific offences because it is not possible—either for VOSA or the police—to require non-UK residents to return to the UK to attend court on such matters. The introduction of graduated fixed penalties and deposits will, however, ensure that they do pay the relevant penalty.
	We do not have any statistics relating to enforcement action taken by the police. However, the police do have the power of arrest and use it to deal with serious offences.
	North Wales Police confirm that in the period 2 January to 18 December 2007 they detected 156 foreign-registered lorries being driven on the A55 in north Wales in contravention of drivers' hours regulations. Records showing individual penalties are not available, but all these vehicles received prohibitions, thereby removing them from being a danger. In addition, three foreign drivers received prison sentences for dangerous driving related to gross breaches of the drivers' hours regulations.

Travel Bans

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many foreign nationals are subject to a travel ban to the United Kingdom, broken down by country; and
	Whether there are any names of foreign nationals subject to a travel ban to the United Kingdom which they are not prepared to disclose; and, if so, on what criteria.

Lord West of Spithead: The names and nationalities of those foreign nationals who are subject to a United Nations or European Union travel ban are available via the following websites:
	www.ec.europa.eu/external_relations/cfsp/sanctions/measures.htm
	www.un.org/sc/committees/index.shtml
	All individuals who are subject to a UN or EU travel ban are normally barred from entering the United Kingdom.
	Separately, since July 2005, Home Secretaries have excluded a total of 221 individuals from the United Kingdom. We have a legal responsibility to handle personal information fairly and would not normally disclose the names of those individuals excluded from the United Kingdom unless it was necessary to do so for a legitimate purpose.

Visas

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether migrant domestic workers granted visas to come to the United Kingdom will receive a visa for a one-year-period and be allowed to change employers during that time, as under the existing 1998 immigration rule.

Lord West of Spithead: Under the current Immigration Rules, migrant domestic workers are granted leave to enter or remain for up to 12 months at a time and may change their employer while in the UK. With the launch of the points-based system, we will be consulting separately on the future of the overseas domestic worker route, following the completion of research and analysis.